GS-61 Con 3
`
`IN THE UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`In re Patent Application of:
`Henry C. Yuen et al.
`
`Application No.: l l/064,219
`
`Confirmation No.: 71 l 1
`
`Filed: February 23, 2005
`
`Art Unit: 2425
`
`For: METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR
`DISPLAYING TELEVISION PROGRAMS
`
`AND RELATED TEXT
`
`Examiner: Saint Cyr, Jean D.
`
`REPLY TO OFFICE ACTION
`
`MS Amendment
`
`Commissioner for Patents
`
`P.O. Box 1450
`
`Alexandria, VA 223 13-1450
`
`Dear Sir:
`
`In response to the Office Action dated August 24, 2009, please enter the following:
`
`The claim listing begins on page 2 of this paper.
`
`Remarks begin on page 8 of this paper.
`
`Comcast, Exhibit—1008
`
`1
`
`Comcast, Exhibit-1008
`
`

`
`Application No. 1 1/064,219
`Amendment dated February 24, 2010
`Reply to Office Action of August 24, 2009
`
`Attorney Docket No. GS-61 Con 3
`
`CLAIMS
`
`1-30.
`
`(Canceled)
`
`31.
`
`(Previously Presented) A system comprising:
`
`a video display;
`
`a video signal tuner;
`
`a memory that stores program listings for a plurality of television programs;
`
`means for displaying a plurality of program identifiers, each related to one of
`
`the program listings, in a schedule area of the video display;
`
`means for displaying a cursor highlighting a first program identifier in the
`
`schedule area;
`
`means for displaying substantially all of an image output by the video signal
`
`tuner in a video area of the video display; and
`
`means for displaying in a description area of the video display, additional
`
`information from the program listing related to the first program identifier
`
`highlighted by the cursor in the schedule area, wherein the additional information
`
`comprises information not in the first program identifier, and wherein the plurality
`
`of program identifiers, the image output by the video signal tuner and the
`
`additional information are simultaneously displayed.
`
`32.
`
`33.
`
`(Previously Presented) The system of claim 31 wherein each of the program
`
`identifiers includes at least a program title.
`
`(Previously Presented) The system of claim 31 further comprising:
`
`a user input; and
`
`means for moving the cursor in the schedule area, based on input received
`
`from the user input, to highlight a second program identifier and automatically
`
`2
`
`

`
`Application No. 1 1/064,219
`Amendment dated February 24, 2010
`Reply to Office Action of August 24, 2009
`
`Attorney Docket No. GS-61 Con 3
`
`change the additional information in the description area to additional information
`
`from the program listing identified by the second program identifier.
`
`34.
`
`(Previously Presented) The system of claim 31 further comprising:
`
`a user input; and
`
`means for controlling the video signal tuner to automatically tune to the
`
`channel of the program corresponding to the program identifier highlighted in the
`
`schedule area by the cursor in response to movements of the cursor in the
`
`schedule area, based on input received from the user input.
`
`35.
`
`(Previously Presented) The system of claim 31 further comprising:
`
`means for controlling the video signal tuner not to change tuning when the
`
`cursor in the schedule area is moved from highlighting a first program identifier
`
`to highlighting a second program identifier.
`
`36.
`
`37.
`
`38.
`
`39.
`
`(Previously Presented) The system of claim 31, 32, 33, 34 or 35 in which the
`
`means for displaying additional information displays the description area such
`
`that the description area does not significantly overlap the video area.
`
`(Previously Presented) The system of claim 31 wherein all of the image output
`
`by the video signal tuner is displayed in the video area of the video display.
`
`(Previously Presented) The system of claim 31 wherein the schedule area does
`
`not overlap the video area.
`
`(Previously Presented) The system of claim 31 in which the means for
`
`displaying additional information displays the description area such that the
`
`description area does not significantly overlap the schedule area.
`
`3
`
`

`
`Application No. l l/064,219
`Amendment dated February 24, 2010
`Reply to Office Action of August 24, 2009
`
`Attorney Docket No. GS-61 Con 3
`
`40.
`
`(Previously Presented) A method for using a video display, a video signal tuner
`
`and a memory, comprising:
`
`storing program listings for a plurality of television programs in the memory;
`
`displaying a plurality of program identifiers, each related to one of the
`
`program listings, in a schedule area of the video display;
`
`displaying a cursor highlighting a first program identifier in the schedule area;
`
`displaying substantially all of an image output by the video signal tuner in a
`
`video area of the video display, the video area being arranged so that the schedule
`
`area does not significantly overlap the video area; and
`
`displaying in a description area of the video display, additional information
`
`from the program listing related to the first program identifier highlighted by the
`
`cursor in the schedule area, wherein the additional information comprises
`
`information not in the first program identifier, and wherein the plurality of
`
`program identifiers, the image output by the video signal tuner and the additional
`
`information are simultaneously displayed.
`
`(Previously Presented) The method of claim 40 wherein the program identifiers
`
`include at least a program title.
`
`(Previously Presented) The method of claim 40 further comprising:
`
`moving the cursor in the schedule area, based on input received from a user
`
`input, to highlight a second program identifier and automatically change the
`
`additional information in the description area to additional information from to
`
`the program listing identified by the second program identifier.
`
`41.
`
`42.
`
`43.
`
`(Previously Presented) The method of claim 40 further comprising:
`
`controlling the video signal tuner to automatically tune to the channel of the
`
`program corresponding to the program identifier highlighted in the schedule area
`
`4
`
`

`
`Application No. l l/064,219
`Amendment dated February 24, 2010
`Reply to Office Action of August 24, 2009
`
`Attorney Docket No. GS-61 Con 3
`
`by the cursor in response to movements of the cursor in the schedule area, based
`
`on input received from a user input.
`
`44.
`
`(Previously Presented) The method of claim 40 further comprising:
`
`controlling the video signal tuner not to change tuning when the cursor in the
`
`schedule area is moved fiom highlighting a first program identifier to highlighting
`
`a second program identifier.
`
`45.
`
`46.
`
`47.
`
`(Previously Presented) The method of claim 40 in which displaying additional
`
`information displays the description area such that the description area does not
`
`significantly overlap the video area.
`
`(Previously Presented) The method of claim 40 wherein displaying
`
`substantially all of the image output by the video signal tuner comprises
`
`displaying all of the image output by the video signal tuner.
`
`(Previously Presented) The method of claim 40 wherein displaying
`
`substantially all of an image output by the video signal tuner in a video area of
`
`the video display such that the schedule area does not significantly overlap the
`
`video area comprises displaying the schedule area such that the schedule area
`
`does not overlap the video area.
`
`48.
`
`(Previously Presented) The method of claim 40 in which displaying additional
`
`information displays the description area such that the description area does not
`
`significantly overlap the schedule area.
`
`49.
`
`(Previously Presented) A system comprising:
`
`a video output;
`
`5
`
`

`
`Application No. l l/064,219
`Amendment dated February 24, 2010
`Reply to Office Action of August 24, 2009
`
`Attorney Docket No. GS-61 Con 3
`
`a memory configured to store electronic program guide data including a
`
`plurality of television program listings;
`
`a video signal tuner configured to display a plurality of program identifiers,
`
`each related to one of the program listings, in a schedule area of a video display
`
`produced by the video output;
`
`a microprocessor coupled to the memory and the video signal tuner, wherein
`
`the microprocessor configured to access the memory to recover the electronic
`
`program guide data;
`
`a video processor coupled to the microprocessor, wherein the video processor
`
`is configured to display a cursor highlighting a first program identifier in the
`
`schedule area, and wherein the video processor configured to display substantially
`
`all of an image output by the video signal tuner in a video area of the video
`
`display, and wherein the video processor is configured to display in a description
`
`area of the video display, additional information from the program listing related
`
`to the first program identifier highlighted by the cursor in the schedule area,
`
`wherein the additional information comprises information not in the first program
`
`identifier, and wherein the video processor simultaneously displays the plurality
`
`of program identifiers, the image output by the video signal tuner and the
`
`additional information.
`
`50.
`
`(Previously Presented) The system of claim 49 further comprising,
`
`a cursor position register coupled to the microprocessor and the video
`
`processor, wherein the cursor position register is configured to move the cursor in
`
`the schedule area, based on a user input, wherein if the cursor highlights a second
`
`program identifier, the additional information in the description area
`
`automatically changes to additional information fiom the program listing
`
`identified by the second program identifier
`
`6
`
`

`
`Application No. 11/064,219
`Amendment dated February 24, 2010
`Reply to Office Action of August 24, 2009
`
`Attorney Docket No. GS-61 Con 3
`
`51.
`
`(Previously Presented) The system of claim 49, wherein if the cursor highlights
`
`a second program identifier in the schedule area, the Video signal tuner is
`
`configured to automatically tune to a second program corresponding to the
`
`second program identifier.
`
`7
`
`

`
`Application No. 11/064,219
`Amendment dated February 24, 2010
`Reply to Office Action of August 24, 2009
`
`Attorney Docket No. GS-61 Con 3
`
`REMARKS
`
`Claims 31-51 are pending in this application.
`
`Provisional Obviousness-Type Double Patenting
`
`Claims 31, 34, and 35 stand provisionally rejected for obviousness-type double patenting
`
`over Application No. 10/704,3 1 8. The Examiner contends that claims 31, 34, and 35 are not
`
`patentably distinct from claims 1, 4, and 2 of Application No. 10/704,318 because claims 31, 34,
`
`and 35 are obvious variants and encompassed by claims 1, 4, and 2. Applicants request the
`
`Examiner to continue to make this "provisional" double patenting rejection so long as there are
`
`conflicting claims in the two applications and until either the 10/704,3 1 8 application issues as a
`
`patent or the "provisional" double patent rejection is the only rejection remaining in this
`
`application. See M.P.E.P. § 804(I)(B). Upon allowance of claims 1, 4 and 2 in Application No.
`
`10/704,3 1 8, Applicants will consider whether the allowed claims are patentably distinct from
`
`claim 31, 34, and 35 in this application and, if appropriate, file a Terminal Disclaimer.
`
`Claims Rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 112, Second Paragraph
`
`Claims 31, 40, 46 and 47 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 112, second paragraph because
`
`the term "substantially" is purportedly "not defined by the claim, the specification does not
`
`provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would
`
`not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention." Applicants respectfully traverse this
`
`rej ection.
`
`As explained previously, Applicants‘ specification would inform one of ordinary skill in
`
`the art that the phrase "substantially all of an image" refers to a displayed image that "generally
`
`convenes most of the essential information of the television program." (Specification, page 20,
`
`lines 15-16.) The specification explains that if a television receiver does not have a PIP chip, the
`
`prompts and the guide and program description may overlay the moving images of a current
`
`8
`
`

`
`Application No. 11/064,219
`Amendment dated February 24, 2010
`Reply to Office Action of August 24, 2009
`
`Attorney Docket No. GS-61 Con 3
`
`television program. The specification further explains that, "this results in loss of part of the
`
`picture of the television program. But, the remainder of the picture, which is the center part of
`
`the image, together with the sound portion thereof generally convenes most of the essential
`
`information of the television program." (Specification, page 20, lines 13-16, emphasis supplied.)
`
`Therefore, a person of ordinary skill would be reasonably apprised of the meaning of term
`
`"substantially" and the scope of the claimed invention. Applicants respectfully submit that the
`
`requirements of 35 U.S.C. § 112, second paragraph have been fully satisfied.
`
`Claim Re'ections under 35 U.S.C.
`
`103 a
`
`Claims 31-33, 38-42, 45, 47-48 and 49-51 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as
`
`being unpatentable over U.S. Patent 5,635,978 ("Alten") in view of U.S. Patent No. 5,710,601
`
`("Marshall"). Applicants respectfully traverse the rejection.
`
`The Office Action contends that Alten discloses "means for displaying a cursor
`
`highlighting a first program identifier in the schedule area (to manually scroll the grid so as to
`
`control the channels being displayed)." (Office Action, page 4.) Applicants disagree. The
`
`section of Alten cited in support of the statement states, "the viewer may also use the remote
`
`control to issue commands to shift the grid to the right to view future time slots." (Alten, col. 15,
`
`lines 10-12.) There is no disclosure there or elsewhere in Alten of displaying a cursor
`
`highlighting a first program identifier in the schedule area, as specified in claim 31.
`
`The Office Action also alleges that Alten discloses "displaying substantially all of an
`
`image output by the video signal tuner in a video area of the video display," citing Alten's FIG.
`
`7C promo window. (Office Action, page 4.) Applicants respectfully disagree. The promo
`
`window of FIGS. 7B-C is described as being used to display a movie clip for an upcoming pay-
`
`per-view movie. (Alten, col. 9, line 60-62.) Alten's promo windows are treated by Alten's data
`
`processor as messages and are generated using the multimedia generator. (Alten, col. 10, lines
`
`47-54.) The multimedia generator receives the promotional material from a disk system and
`
`9
`
`

`
`Application No. 11/064,219
`Amendment dated February 24, 2010
`Reply to Office Action of August 24, 2009
`
`Attorney Docket No. GS-61 Con 3
`
`converts it, using a video generator, to a video format signal for the screen display.
`
`(Alten, col.
`
`7, line 41 to col. 8, line 27.) There is no disclosure in Alten that its promo windows are provided
`
`by a video signal tuner, or that its promo windows are provided by displaying substantially all of
`
`an image output by the video signal tuner in a video area of the video display, as specified in
`
`claim 31.
`
`The Examiner admits that Alten does not "disclose means for displaying in a description
`
`area of the video display, additional information from the program listing related to the first
`
`program identifier highlighted by the cursor in the schedule area, wherein the additional
`
`information comprises information not in the first program identifier, and wherein the plurality
`
`of program identifiers, the image output by the video signal tuner and the additional information
`
`are simultaneously displayed," but attempts to fill the deficiency with the disclosure in Marshall.
`
`(Office Action, page 4.) In support of the contention, the Examiner cites Marshall, FIG. 8 and
`
`col. 3, lines 41-43, and explains that, fiom FIG. 8 "the viewer then presses a predetermined key
`
`on the remote 35, such as a highlight button, to cause the written description and video clip
`
`related to the selected program to be displayed on the video screen." Applicants respectfully
`
`disagree.
`
`Marshall's FIG. 8 displays program information and an image for a program highlighted
`
`in the program schedule shown in Marshall's FIG. 7. The program information and image are
`
`the only items displayed in Marshall's FIG. 8. The image in Marshall's FIG. 8 is supplied by a
`
`video clip. (Marshall, col. 3, lines 42-43.) Marshall's video clips are received and stored as
`
`input picture image signals by a computer. (Marshall, col. 1, lines 45-48.) The computer also
`
`generates an output picture image signal of input picture image signals. (Marshall, col. 1, lines
`
`49-51.) A display signal is generated in Marshall using a signal combiner to combine the video
`
`clip that is to be superimposed over any current programming signals. (Marshall, col. 1, lines
`
`54-59.) Thus, Marshall, like Alten, does not disclose displaying an image output by the video
`
`signal tuner, as specified in claim 31.
`
`10
`
`10
`
`10
`
`

`
`Application No. 11/064,219
`Amendment dated February 24, 2010
`Reply to Office Action of August 24, 2009
`
`Attorney Docket No. GS-61 Con 3
`
`Although Marshall discloses displaying program information for a selected program
`
`listing in FIG. 8, it does so without maintaining the program listings shown in FIG. 7. The
`
`Office Action alleges that it would have been obvious for any person of ordinary skill in the art
`
`to modify Alten with Marshall's program descriptions for the purpose of allowing users to have
`
`more details about the highlighted video. Applicants disagree. Alten displays program
`
`information and supplementary information in its program listing grid cells based on its "text fit
`
`system". (Alten, col. 11, line 55 to col. 13, line 49.) Thus, using Alten's "text fit system" a
`
`viewer would likely not need to View additional program related information. In addition, Alten
`
`describes improving guide cycle time by use of full listing pages or occasionally using split
`
`screens that have promotional information to provide cable operators with revenue sources.
`
`(Alten, col. 2, lines39-41.) Alten also teaches away from providing a split screen guide with
`
`additional information of interest to a viewer because of the disadvantage of longer cycle times.
`
`(Alten, col. 1, line 67 to col. 2, line 3.) Thus, a person of ordinary skill in the art would not be
`
`motivated to combine Alten and Marshall's program information because of the disadvantages
`
`noted by Alten.
`
`Even if Alten and Marshall were combined, however, neither discloses displaying
`
`substantially all of an image output by the video signal tuner in a video area of the video display,
`
`as recited in claim 31. Thus, claim 31 is patentable over the references because they do not
`
`describe all of the elements of claim 31. Independent claims 40 and 49 include the same
`
`element, and are also patentable over the references for the same reason. Dependent claims 32-
`
`39, 41-48 and 50-51, which depend from claims 31, 40, or 49 are also patentable over the
`
`references for the same reason.
`
`Thus, for all of the reasons discussed above, pending claims 31-51 are patentable over the
`
`cited references. Applicants respectfully request reconsideration and allowance of the claims.
`
`11
`
`‘I1
`
`11
`
`

`
`Application No. 11/064,219
`Amendment dated February 24, 2010
`Reply to Office Action of August 24, 2009
`
`Attorney Docket No. GS-61 Con 3
`
`Claims 34, 37, 43 and 46 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as unpatentable over
`
`Alten in View of Marshall and U.S. Patent 5,583,560 ("Florin"). Florin fails to satisfy the
`
`deficiencies of Alten and Marshall. With respect to claims 34 and 43, the Examiner cites Florin's
`
`FIG.12 and col. 15, lines 46-49. (Office Action, page 8.) Florin does not disclose a relationship
`
`between a highlighted program identifier and the Video signal tuner, which is shown by the
`
`unchanged program 250/251 shown in FIGS. 12/ 13 when different program listings are
`
`highlighted. In respect of claims 37 and 46, the Examiner cites to Florin's FIG. 6 and col. 13,
`
`lines 3-5, which describes a full screen Viewing function but without all of the display elements
`
`recited in claims 37 and 46. Thus, claims 34, 27, 43 and 46 are patentable over Alten, Marshall
`
`and Florin.
`
`Claims 35 and 44 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as unpatentable over Alten in
`
`View of Marshall and U.S. Patent 5,557,338 ("Maze"). Even if Maze is prior art, which
`
`Applicants do not admit, Maze fails to satisfy the deficiencies of Alten and Marshall, as
`
`discussed above. Therefore, claims 34 and 43 are nonobvious in light of Alten and Maze.
`
`For at least these reasons, Applicants respectfully submit that this application is in
`
`condition for allowance.
`
`February 24, 2010
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`
`/Pristine Johannessen/
`
`Pristine Johannessen
`
`Reg. No. 55,302
`Attorney for Applicants
`ROPES & GRAY LLP
`
`Customer No. 75563
`
`12
`
`12
`
`12